Back to court?

The Princeton Board of Selectmen has some explaining to do to its constituents about why it may sink more money and energy into pursuing the death penalty against a dog that's already earned one reprieve in court.

To be sure, the board was within its rights to take some action against Sunny, the 15-year-old Malamute that bit a Princeton man and may have bitten another person at his owner's business in Sterling. We don't agree that the single biting incident in Princeton warranted euthanasia, as ordered by the board, and a clerk magistrate in Leominster District Court, believing similarly, overturned the order. The dog's owner Leo Montagna spent $6,000 to have an eight-foot-tall chain-link pen erected in his yard, enrolled himself and Sunny in a 12-week training course to work on the dog's behavior, and scheduled a date to have the animal neutered.

The board isn't satisfied, and last week announced its intention to appeal the decision.

Princeton residents now should ask for two things: 1. Evidence that the lone biting incident in town was so savage that Sunny is irredeemable and continues to pose a danger, even after three months of training and with a new home behind eight feet of steel fencing, and 2. A full accounting of how much the town has already spent in legal fees to try and put Sunny down, and, if possible, an estimate of how much an appeal will cost. It's hard to imagine when there's talk of cutting every sector of the budget in FY10 that this particular case, and the thousands of dollars it will consume, is a worthwhile endeavor for the benefit of the community.

Leo Montagna is a member of that community, too, and he seems to be doing everything he can to get Sunny on track. One thing he could do to assuage the board is sign a formal agreement outlining the steps he's taken, and will take, to control his dog and prevent any further incidents. Until then selectmen should drop the notion of pursuing this appeal.